[Flexradio] Split 28MHz Transverter RX/TX IF?
Looking through the Operating Manual (V1.4) and the RFE board schematic it is not entirely clear to me how I should proceed with setting up the SDR-1000 for sepparate 28MHz RX/TX IF lines for use with external ransverters. I have the 1W version and do not have the internal microwave 2M intermediate IF transverter (DEMI144-28FRS) installed. I have no plans to add it in the future either. So my goal is to be able to run my existing split RX/TX IF transverters with the SDR-1000 as is without making any mods to the transverters. I also use closure to ground PTT on all the transverters as well and do not want to modify that either. Additionally I really want to maintain plug and play compatibilty with my exiting transverter IF radios. It looks like it may be possible to use the antenna BNC of the SDR-1000 as the RX in and then make up a coax cable to a another panel mounted BNC connected to J2 of the RFE as the TX IF. Is that workable HW-wise and what software changes would be required to make that work (if any)? I'm looking into this now because I'll be digging into the radio to apply the ECO20 ECO25 updates and thought that as long as I'm in there I should actually get serious about putting the SDR-1000 on the air in TX operation. So far I've only used it as an RX. Duane N9DG __ Yahoo! for Good Donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. http://store.yahoo.com/redcross-donate3/
Re: [Flexradio] SDR-1000 Remote Control
I too am using a form of remote control for my SDR-1000. VNC works well on my internal home network and provides a host of features, such as the ability to reboot the remote PC that is running the SDR. I also have experimented with a feature built into Windows XP and that is called Remote Desktop. It works well and is fast but does not allow rebooting remotely. Since my configuration doesn't even have a monitor on the SDR PC, I end up using VNC most of the time. This setup allows exceptional flexibility regarding the placement of my ham gear .. and the wife loves that feature. I can also use the radio from anywhere, via the internet and Skype, by placing the Flex PC outside of the firewall. I see that I am not original with this configuration however, just another of those that are finding technology a neat addition to ham radio! --Larry W8ER - Original Message - From: Robert McGwier [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: FlexRadio Reflector FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 11:16 PM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] SDR-1000 Remote Control This technology has progressed a lot since we used it in the early days. I regularly check in to Eric's desktop and control the console, etc. when we need to communicate some complex procedure. The only reason Eric doesn't reciprocate is that it is not allowed at my work place (firewall prevents it). I strongly recommend http://ultravnc.sourceforge.net It is simply spectacular. The File transfer and speed are amazing. Eric thinks that tightvnc may be faster but it is the extra features, security, etc. that have sold me on Ultravnc. It communicates effectively with my tightvnc servers on my Linux boxes as well. I have several friends and colleagues who have put LapLink into the dust bin after running UltraVNC. For those who ran earlier versions, the crashes and other problems have been fixed. Version 1.0.1 seems very solid indeed. Bob Ken N9VV wrote: Tom, when the PowerSDR console was in it's infancy, many of us used TightVNC which allowed the folks at Flex to control our PCs to see the same features [a.k.a. bugs] we saw. There are various technical advantages to TightVNC like isn't jpg compression and very small footprint on the server and client side. I recommend it to you for your testing http://www.tightvnc.com You should get on Teamspeak and check with Hank K9LZJ who has his station remoted. He has significant experience with various setups and communication channels. and you might find this interesting http://www.n9vv.com/Images/SDR1000/W4MQ-Remote-SDR-1000.pdf and http://www.flex-radio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1211 and http://www.n9vv.com/Images/SDR1000/WO0Z-Flex-Client-Server-2.pdf de Ken N9VV Tom Thompson wrote: I have some good news to report on controlling the SDR-1000 remotely. I installed a VNC (virtual network computing) application from http://www.gotomypc.com on the host computer which is used for the ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] Split 28MHz Transverter RX/TX IF?
Duane I modified my original 3 board set to do split Rx/Tx by removing the output relay, cutting one jumper between pads under the relay, re-installing the relay and then adding a second BNC jack wired directly to the trace on the PIO board going to the input amplifier from the relay. I am going to add the RFE board and make the ECO20, 25 mods this weekend, given the time (Mid-Atlantic VHF Conference) and will let you know how it went. Phil, K3IB - Original Message - From: Duane - N9DG [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 12:25 AM Subject: [Flexradio] Split 28MHz Transverter RX/TX IF? Looking through the Operating Manual (V1.4) and the RFE board schematic it is not entirely clear to me how I should proceed with setting up the SDR-1000 for sepparate 28MHz RX/TX IF lines for use with external ransverters. I have the 1W version and do not have the internal microwave 2M intermediate IF transverter (DEMI144-28FRS) installed. I have no plans to add it in the future either. So my goal is to be able to run my existing split RX/TX IF transverters with the SDR-1000 as is without making any mods to the transverters. I also use closure to ground PTT on all the transverters as well and do not want to modify that either. Additionally I really want to maintain plug and play compatibilty with my exiting transverter IF radios. It looks like it may be possible to use the antenna BNC of the SDR-1000 as the RX in and then make up a coax cable to a another panel mounted BNC connected to J2 of the RFE as the TX IF. Is that workable HW-wise and what software changes would be required to make that work (if any)? I'm looking into this now because I'll be digging into the radio to apply the ECO20 ECO25 updates and thought that as long as I'm in there I should actually get serious about putting the SDR-1000 on the air in TX operation. So far I've only used it as an RX. Duane N9DG __ Yahoo! for Good Donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. http://store.yahoo.com/redcross-donate3/ ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] Audiocards, USB, etc.
Hi, Bob: Esi Juli unbalanced loopback @ 24-bit, 48 kHz mode: http://www.hot.ee/es7aaz/Juli.htm P.S. It was RMAA 5.4 when I did this measurement. Rgds, Riho, ES7AAZ. Robert W McGwier wrote: I sure do wish ESI/Audiotrak DirectWire 3.0 worked with other products. Please read the manufacturers specifications on these MAYA, ESI, Audiotrak cards, and in particular, please pay close attention to the noise floor specs. This is usually given in the A/D SNR or A/D dynamic range and is measured in dBA usually. The Delta 44, as specified on the M-Audio web site, measures 99 dBA. The Maya products, even their latest ones are 90 dBA. The Lynx L22 and the Audiophile 192 are well over 100 dBA but neither has sufficient inputs and outputs for our current working model. The ESI Juli that Riho likes has seriously good dynamic range if it meets their claims of 112 dB. It would be good if Riho could measure the loopback performance with RightMark Audio Analyzer (5.5 is now out) and let us know the results with this card. http://audio.rightmark.org/index_new.shtml For those who are just before giving up on a USB solution for your laptop, and will consider using 16 bit cards, the MAYA44 USB has better specs than the Extigy or the MP3+. Here is a block diagram of its workings: http://www.audiotrak.net/images/maya44usb_bd1.gif Its A/D SNR is 86 dBA and this is because of 18 bit parts. I have no experience with Maya, Audiotrak, etc. but the products look interesting and if they continue to improve the noise floor, we should get something reasonable from them. The Juli's specs look really good if they are hold up under measurement. It will be good for all soundcard program modes using the DirectWire 3.0 software. Bob N4HY ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] SDR-1000 Remote Control
Hi Leon .. Yes, except that XP's remote desktop does not allow you to pass on a CTL-ALT-DEL to the remote computer to start the task manager. With a little investigation into the name of the executable and placing an icon on the remote computers desktop, you probably could start it remotely, but I haven't gone that far. VNC already does it. --Larry - Original Message - From: Leon Helms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Larry W8ER [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 11:58 AM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] SDR-1000 Remote Control Larry, You can remotely reboot XP from the Task Manager (right click in the taskbar). I use both VNC-Ultra and remote desktop. 73, Leon N6VS At 09:40 PM 9/22/2005, you wrote: I too am using a form of remote control for my SDR-1000. VNC works well on my internal home network and provides a host of features, such as the ability to reboot the remote PC that is running the SDR. I also have experimented with a feature built into Windows XP and that is called Remote Desktop. It works well and is fast but does not allow rebooting remotely. Since my configuration doesn't even have a monitor on the SDR PC, I end up using VNC most of the time. This setup allows exceptional flexibility regarding the placement of my ham gear .. and the wife loves that feature. I can also use the radio from anywhere, via the internet and Skype, by placing the Flex PC outside of the firewall. I see that I am not original with this configuration however, just another of those that are finding technology a neat addition to ham radio! --Larry W8ER - Original Message - From: Robert McGwier [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: FlexRadio Reflector FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 11:16 PM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] SDR-1000 Remote Control This technology has progressed a lot since we used it in the early days. I regularly check in to Eric's desktop and control the console, etc. when we need to communicate some complex procedure. The only reason Eric doesn't reciprocate is that it is not allowed at my work place (firewall prevents it). I strongly recommend http://ultravnc.sourceforge.net It is simply spectacular. The File transfer and speed are amazing. Eric thinks that tightvnc may be faster but it is the extra features, security, etc. that have sold me on Ultravnc. It communicates effectively with my tightvnc servers on my Linux boxes as well. I have several friends and colleagues who have put LapLink into the dust bin after running UltraVNC. For those who ran earlier versions, the crashes and other problems have been fixed. Version 1.0.1 seems very solid indeed. Bob Ken N9VV wrote: Tom, when the PowerSDR console was in it's infancy, many of us used TightVNC which allowed the folks at Flex to control our PCs to see the same features [a.k.a. bugs] we saw. There are various technical advantages to TightVNC like isn't jpg compression and very small footprint on the server and client side. I recommend it to you for your testing http://www.tightvnc.com You should get on Teamspeak and check with Hank K9LZJ who has his station remoted. He has significant experience with various setups and communication channels. and you might find this interesting http://www.n9vv.com/Images/SDR1000/W4MQ-Remote-SDR-1000.pdf and http://www.flex-radio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1211 and http://www.n9vv.com/Images/SDR1000/WO0Z-Flex-Client-Server-2.pdf de Ken N9VV Tom Thompson wrote: I have some good news to report on controlling the SDR-1000 remotely. I installed a VNC (virtual network computing) application from http://www.gotomypc.com on the host computer which is used for the ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] SDR-1000 Remote Control
Right-click on the task bar - select from popup menu. Simon Brown --- www.hb9drv.ch www.laax.ch RSGB HF Convention: Friday 7th - Sunday 9th October 2005 Holidays: Monday 10th - Thursday 20th October 2005 - Original Message - From: Larry W8ER [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Leon .. Yes, except that XP's remote desktop does not allow you to pass on a CTL-ALT-DEL to the remote computer to start the task manager. With a little investigation into the name of the executable and placing an icon on the remote computers desktop, you probably could start it remotely, but I haven't gone that far. VNC already does it.
[Flexradio] Filtering DDS spurs possible?
I have a question about DDS performance. I look forward to the day when DDS is not a bad word with regard to receiver LO performance. There has been much discussion in all the email lists that involve DDS vfo's in their operation. At present, the DDS spectral issue is limiting our ability to produce an ultra high performance receiver. I have thought about this 'spur' problem quite a bit, and wonder if it's possible to filter out the spurs in the present generation of DDS chips. I present a possible method for doing so in the following paragraphs and invite comments and discussion. -- If one uses a DDS in a conventional typical QSD with software defined radio type software, the bins in the receiver might be 10 Hz wide. By this, I mean the receivers DSP software looks at 10 Hz wide chunks of spectrum and quantifies the energy in each 10 Hz wide chunk of spectrum. If the DDS chip has a small output corresponding to a particular 10 Hz bin, the software cannot distinguish between the desired signal having energy in this chunk of spectrum or whether it's the DDS (LO) that has a spur that falls within that 10 Hz chunk of spectrumso, the software has to treat the DDS spur as though it was a weak, but desired signal. Hence, the DDS with a spur actually generates 'interference'. According to one QSD/SDR icons comments on another mailing list, it is unlikely that any 10 Hz wide bin escapes the spur problem because they are small but prevalent! So the bins are to large to avoid DDS spurs, the spurs are very widespread (well distributed in the output spectrum of the DDS). I know FlexRadio uses math to look for 'sweet spots' and jogs the LO and the sound card IF frequency to keep the DDS tuned to these spur free zones BUT. What would happen if the bins were (say, for instance) .1 Hz (or even .01 Hz) wide? That's 100 (or 1000) times less spectrum per each bin, and 100 (or 1000) times less chance of having a spur fall within a particular (randomly selected) bin. It's much narrower than we need to receive a cw or ssb signal, except in some specialized weak signal work where we use argo to look for very very weak (but coherent) constant frequency carriers. With .1 Hz wide FFT bins, many of the bins would be spur free. BUT.. How can our FFT software tell whether the bin that has energy above the baseline level is the result of a weak desired signal or is the result of a DDS spur?? How about (temporarily) shorting the antenna terminals once the user has stopped tuning, and scanning for bins with energy in them? Those bins with energy in them are probably due to the DDS LO generated spurs. Once the bins with energy in them are identified, they can be removed electronically by having the FFT software toss out the energy in that particular bin before recombining the energy in the entire 3 KHz spectrum in order to listen to our desired ssb signal. This can only work if the spurs are coherent or remain on the same frequency (once the user stops tuning). Since the DDS output is digital, presumably these spurs are not random in nature and occur at the same amplitude and frequency all the time. I am software challenged myself. Maybe some of the more DDS savvy hardware people can comment on the coherence, amplitude stability and how often spurs occur when you zoom in on a 3 Khz slice of spectrum with much finer resolution than the typical 10 Hz wide FFT bin. Obviously this method would involve a heavier DSP processing load, but the spurs could be removed to allow for detection of weaker signals that are presently masked by the DDS spurs. Would this scheme allow us to use a 'dirty' DDS output for our LO's without concern for spurs at all (trading processor load for improved weak signal receive capability)? Regards, Art -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.5/110 - Release Date: 9/22/2005
Re: [Flexradio] SDR-1000 Remote Control
Please note that the Windows XP Remote Desktop server is ONLY on Windows XP Professional Edition (not XP Home). I use VNC personally, as it is a fully functional open source alternative that has cross platform support. Eric Wachsmann FlexRadio Systems -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] radio.biz] On Behalf Of KD5NWA Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 1:48 PM To: Larry W8ER Cc: Flex Reflector Subject: Re: [Flexradio] SDR-1000 Remote Control Right Click on the Task Bar at the bottom of the screen and see that one of the choices is, Task Manager, works quite well while controlling a remote PC. Shutdown -r will reboot the remote PC when executed on the remote PC. Remote desktop is very fast, due to it being integrated into windows XP, one less thing to install. At 01:01 PM 9/23/2005, Larry W8ER wrote: Hi Leon .. Yes, except that XP's remote desktop does not allow you to pass on a CTL-ALT-DEL to the remote computer to start the task manager. With a little investigation into the name of the executable and placing an icon on the remote computers desktop, you probably could start it remotely, but I haven't gone that far. VNC already does it. --Larry - Original Message - From: Leon Helms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Larry W8ER [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 11:58 AM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] SDR-1000 Remote Control Larry, You can remotely reboot XP from the Task Manager (right click in the taskbar). I use both VNC-Ultra and remote desktop. 73, Leon N6VS At 09:40 PM 9/22/2005, you wrote: I too am using a form of remote control for my SDR-1000. VNC works well on my internal home network and provides a host of features, such as the ability to reboot the remote PC that is running the SDR. I also have experimented with a feature built into Windows XP and that is called Remote Desktop. It works well and is fast but does not allow rebooting remotely. Since my configuration doesn't even have a monitor on the SDR PC, I end up using VNC most of the time. This setup allows exceptional flexibility regarding the placement of my ham gear .. and the wife loves that feature. I can also use the radio from anywhere, via the internet and Skype, by placing the Flex PC outside of the firewall. I see that I am not original with this configuration however, just another of those that are finding technology a neat addition to ham radio! --Larry W8ER - Original Message - From: Robert McGwier [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: FlexRadio Reflector FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 11:16 PM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] SDR-1000 Remote Control This technology has progressed a lot since we used it in the early days. I regularly check in to Eric's desktop and control the console, etc. when we need to communicate some complex procedure. The only reason Eric doesn't reciprocate is that it is not allowed at my work place (firewall prevents it). I strongly recommend http://ultravnc.sourceforge.net It is simply spectacular. The File transfer and speed are amazing. Eric thinks that tightvnc may be faster but it is the extra features, security, etc. that have sold me on Ultravnc. It communicates effectively with my tightvnc servers on my Linux boxes as well. I have several friends and colleagues who have put LapLink into the dust bin after running UltraVNC. For those who ran earlier versions, the crashes and other problems have been fixed. Version 1.0.1 seems very solid indeed. Bob Ken N9VV wrote: Tom, when the PowerSDR console was in it's infancy, many of us used TightVNC which allowed the folks at Flex to control our PCs to see the same features [a.k.a. bugs] we saw. There are various technical advantages to TightVNC like isn't jpg compression and very small footprint on the server and client side. I recommend it to you for your testing http://www.tightvnc.com You should get on Teamspeak and check with Hank K9LZJ who has his station remoted. He has significant experience with various setups and communication channels. and you might find this interesting http://www.n9vv.com/Images/SDR1000/W4MQ-Remote-SDR-1000.pdf and http://www.flex-radio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1211 and http://www.n9vv.com/Images/SDR1000/WO0Z-Flex-Client-Server-2.pdf de Ken N9VV Tom Thompson wrote: I have some good news to report on controlling the SDR-1000 remotely. I installed a VNC (virtual network computing) application from http://www.gotomypc.com on the host computer which is used for the ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] Filtering DDS spurs possible?
At 11:37 AM 9/23/2005, KY1K wrote: I have a question about DDS performance. I look forward to the day when DDS is not a bad word with regard to receiver LO performance. There has been much discussion in all the email lists that involve DDS vfo's in their operation. At present, the DDS spectral issue is limiting our ability to produce an ultra high performance receiver. I don't know that this is quite true. It limits the ability to do a simple DDS as LO to first mixer receiver. There are a variety of strategies to cleanup DDS outputs (e.g. using the DDS inside a PLL, for instance), however, they are all more complex. I have thought about this 'spur' problem quite a bit, and wonder if it's possible to filter out the spurs in the present generation of DDS chips. I present a possible method for doing so in the following paragraphs and invite comments and discussion. -- If one uses a DDS in a conventional typical QSD with software defined radio type software, the bins in the receiver might be 10 Hz wide. By this, I mean the receivers DSP software looks at 10 Hz wide chunks of spectrum and quantifies the energy in each 10 Hz wide chunk of spectrum. If the DDS chip has a small output corresponding to a particular 10 Hz bin, the software cannot distinguish between the desired signal having energy in this chunk of spectrum or whether it's the DDS (LO) that has a spur that falls within that 10 Hz chunk of spectrumso, the software has to treat the DDS spur as though it was a weak, but desired signal. Hence, the DDS with a spur actually generates 'interference'. According to one QSD/SDR icons comments on another mailing list, it is unlikely that any 10 Hz wide bin escapes the spur problem because they are small but prevalent! So the bins are to large to avoid DDS spurs, the spurs are very widespread (well distributed in the output spectrum of the DDS). I know FlexRadio uses math to look for 'sweet spots' and jogs the LO and the sound card IF frequency to keep the DDS tuned to these spur free zones BUT. What would happen if the bins were (say, for instance) .1 Hz (or even .01 Hz) wide? That's 100 (or 1000) times less spectrum per each bin, and 100 (or 1000) times less chance of having a spur fall within a particular (randomly selected) bin. It's much narrower than we need to receive a cw or ssb signal, except in some specialized weak signal work where we use argo to look for very very weak (but coherent) constant frequency carriers. One can do this.. for instance, you can deliberately control the DDS to produce spurs that are distinct, and not spread around, and then notch the spurs out. And, as for removing copies of the desired signal that are created by spurs (imagine you had a pair of LOs separated by 1 kHz.. your IF would have two copies of the input, separated by 1kHz), you could remove them by deconvolving it. (not trivial for a number of reasons, but you get the concept) Gotta watch out for reciprocal mixing though, because you may not know the frequency of the interfering signal that you want to suppress (so you get get good adjacent signal rejection). The frequency of the spur in your IF is the combination of the DDS spur frequency and the undesired signal. YOu know the spur, but don't know the undesired signal, so you don't know where to notch. You CAN solve this problem too, by estimating the unknown signal's properties and then subtracting the estimate out (Techniques like MUSIC and ESPRIT are based on this kind of idea). With .1 Hz wide FFT bins, many of the bins would be spur free. BUT.. How can our FFT software tell whether the bin that has energy above the baseline level is the result of a weak desired signal or is the result of a DDS spur?? How about (temporarily) shorting the antenna terminals once the user has stopped tuning, and scanning for bins with energy in them? Those bins with energy in them are probably due to the DDS LO generated spurs. Once the bins with energy in them are identified, they can be removed electronically by having the FFT software toss out the energy in that particular bin before recombining the energy in the entire 3 KHz spectrum in order to listen to our desired ssb signal. This would work for noise getting in by reciprocal mixing, and would serve nicely as a calibration of the spurs. Also, though, the spurs themselves have a width that is determined by the phase noise of the reference clock for the DDS. Get your bins too narrow, and the spur covers several bins. While one can do a transform with superresolution (i.e. bin width narrower than 1/Length of block transformed), there's no additional information in the transform. Bear in mind that 1 Hz resolution implies a 1 second chunk of data to process. This can only work if the spurs are coherent or remain on the same frequency (once the user stops tuning). Since the DDS output is
Re: [Flexradio] Audiocards, USB, etc.
Riho: Muchas gracias! Spectacular. Only my Lynx L22 has measured better. 73 Bob rihob., es7aaz wrote: Hi, Bob: Esi Juli unbalanced loopback @ 24-bit, 48 kHz mode: http://www.hot.ee/es7aaz/Juli.htm P.S. It was RMAA 5.4 when I did this measurement. Rgds, Riho, ES7AAZ.
Re: [Flexradio] SDR-1000 Remote Control
Robert McGwier wrote: This technology has progressed a lot since we used it in the early days. I regularly check in to Eric's desktop and control the console, etc. when we need to communicate some complex procedure. The only reason Eric doesn't reciprocate is that it is not allowed at my work place (firewall prevents it). I strongly recommend http://ultravnc.sourceforge.net It is simply spectacular. The File transfer and speed are amazing. Eric thinks that tightvnc may be faster but it is the extra features, security, etc. that have sold me on Ultravnc. It communicates effectively with my tightvnc servers on my Linux boxes as well. I have several friends and colleagues who have put LapLink into the dust bin after running UltraVNC. For those who ran earlier versions, the crashes and other problems have been fixed. Version 1.0.1 seems very solid indeed. Bob Ken N9VV wrote: Tom, when the PowerSDR console was in it's infancy, many of us used TightVNC which allowed the folks at Flex to control our PCs to see the same features [a.k.a. bugs] we saw. There are various technical advantages to TightVNC like isn't jpg compression and very small footprint on the server and client side. I recommend it to you for your testing http://www.tightvnc.com You should get on Teamspeak and check with Hank K9LZJ who has his station remoted. He has significant experience with various setups and communication channels. and you might find this interesting http://www.n9vv.com/Images/SDR1000/W4MQ-Remote-SDR-1000.pdf and http://www.flex-radio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1211 and http://www.n9vv.com/Images/SDR1000/WO0Z-Flex-Client-Server-2.pdf de Ken N9VV Tom Thompson wrote: I have some good news to report on controlling the SDR-1000 remotely. I installed a VNC (virtual network computing) application from http://www.gotomypc.com on the host computer which is used for the ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz I have been following this thread with interest. I downloaded Ultra VNC this afternoon and have been playing around with it. Pretty slick. One question though. How can you do the audio? . . . . and even keying? Jim, W3BG
Re: [Flexradio] Audiocards, USB, etc.
Hi Riho and Bob, If I am not mistaken, the dynamic range of the loopback measurement in this case may be limited by the DAC that happens to have noise about -106 dBA. Another limiting factor is the maximum signal before clipping. The important parameters for our SDR-1000 receivers are the noise and clipping levels of the ADC. Almost all ADC's in higher class audio cards with balanced input have reasonably low noise but the clipping level may be too low. According to my measurements with Waveterminal 192X the clipping level is +22 dBu and the noise at 24 kHz bandwidth is less than -103 dBu. The measurements have been made with carefully balanced input and isolating audio transformers at the input and output connections. Sorry, I don't have the A-weighing filter. Due to the home made signal generator and low noise instrumentation amplifier I cannot guarantee the correctness of my measurement values, but clearly the limitations seem to be on the SDR-1000 hardware side. 73, Ahti OH2RZ - Original Message - From: rihob., es7aaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 7:15 PM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Audiocards, USB, etc. Hi, Bob: Esi Juli unbalanced loopback @ 24-bit, 48 kHz mode: http://www.hot.ee/es7aaz/Juli.htm P.S. It was RMAA 5.4 when I did this measurement. Rgds, Riho, ES7AAZ.
Re: [Flexradio] SDR-1000 Remote Control
Have you tried K2NET from G4ILO? I believe it does both audio (mp3) and control codes using a Kenwood style control alphabet http://www.tech-pro.net/g4ilo/index.html
Re: [Flexradio] Audiocards, USB, etc.
You might not be getting a true measure simply by checking sensitivity (noise floor) and clipping (largest signal). I think this measurement would be good only if the card is known not to change its internal gain between these two measurements types. Do audio cards do this? Do they have built in variable gain structures that automatically handle input signal overload? If so, what is then needed is an audio blocking test where a weakest detectable audio signal is injected, and a large signal neighbor is injected to the point the weak signal goes away (blocked). This test will truly show the usable dynamic range of an audio card. We would like to have this dynamic range very large, ideally 130 to 145 db to match the blocking performance of other rigs (I think not very practical), but we do want this as large as possible. - Dan, N7VE -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ahti Aintila Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 4:09 PM To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Audiocards, USB, etc. Hi Riho and Bob, If I am not mistaken, the dynamic range of the loopback measurement in this case may be limited by the DAC that happens to have noise about -106 dBA. Another limiting factor is the maximum signal before clipping. The important parameters for our SDR-1000 receivers are the noise and clipping levels of the ADC. Almost all ADC's in higher class audio cards with balanced input have reasonably low noise but the clipping level may be too low. According to my measurements with Waveterminal 192X the clipping level is +22 dBu and the noise at 24 kHz bandwidth is less than -103 dBu. The measurements have been made with carefully balanced input and isolating audio transformers at the input and output connections. Sorry, I don't have the A-weighing filter. Due to the home made signal generator and low noise instrumentation amplifier I cannot guarantee the correctness of my measurement values, but clearly the limitations seem to be on the SDR-1000 hardware side. 73, Ahti OH2RZ - Original Message - From: rihob., es7aaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 7:15 PM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Audiocards, USB, etc. Hi, Bob: Esi Juli unbalanced loopback @ 24-bit, 48 kHz mode: http://www.hot.ee/es7aaz/Juli.htm P.S. It was RMAA 5.4 when I did this measurement. Rgds, Riho, ES7AAZ. ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Re: [Flexradio] Audiocards, USB, etc.
At 05:05 PM 9/23/2005, Tayloe Dan-P26412 wrote: You might not be getting a true measure simply by checking sensitivity (noise floor) and clipping (largest signal). I think this measurement would be good only if the card is known not to change its internal gain between these two measurements types. Do audio cards do this? Do they have built in variable gain structures that automatically handle input signal overload? If so, what is then needed is an audio blocking test where a weakest detectable audio signal is injected, and a large signal neighbor is injected to the point the weak signal goes away (blocked). This test will truly show the usable dynamic range of an audio card. We would like to have this dynamic range very large, ideally 130 to 145 db to match the blocking performance of other rigs (I think not very practical), but we do want this as large as possible. In fact, this is the kind of testing done on high performance A/Ds. You really also need to quantify things like differential non-linearity, timing jitter, etc, as well. There's also tests that resemble two tone testing for amplifiers, except they use broader band signals with precision notches. James Lux, P.E. Spacecraft Radio Frequency Subsystems Group Flight Communications Systems Section Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Mail Stop 161-213 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109 tel: (818)354-2075 fax: (818)393-6875
[Flexradio] Vers 1.4.5 Compandor Action
I have been playing around with version 1.4.5 and I noticed that the compandor function seems to decrease the output of the transmitter. I realize that it is supposed to keep the audio at a relatively constant level. In version 1.4.4 with the compandor activated my average power on a wattmeter was significantly higher than with it out of the circuit. In version 1.4.5 with the compandor on it is significantly lower than with it off. With the power level set at 60 watts, mic gain at 43, using a Heil HC5 element and compressor and compandor off the highest reading of the peak power indicator is about 383 but it stays around the 100 watt level most of the time. With the compandor on the highest reading is 138 and it stays around the 40 watt level most of the time. In version 1.4.4 with the same parameters set, the peak power out reads 66 consistently. My setting for the compandor is 3 on both versions. Audio quality is excellent on both versions no matter what I do. Running the D44 with a Asus 3.2 Ghz comp. 73, Dale AA5XE
Re: [Flexradio] Audiocards, USB, etc.
At 05:40 PM 9/23/2005, Tayloe Dan-P26412 wrote: I would think that on top of the audio blocking test we also want to run audio IP3 tests and audio IP2 dynamic range tests as well to make sure that the distortion characteristics are at least as good as the SDR1000 front end. - Dan, N7VE Such tests would be useful, but are quite challenging to make for high performance systems. You can take two general approaches: 1) Obssessively account for all the error sources, use very clean sources, etc. so you can truly know that what you've measured is just the unit under test, and not quirks of the experimental setup. 2) Measure it in a typical setup, in which case the performance will certainly measure out worse, but at least it's representative of what you'll really get. Consider that if you're looking for 140 dB relative levels, you're looking for signals of a 0.1 microvolt on a 1 volt signal. I've done DC measurements to 6 digits, and it's, frankly, an ordeal. You'd also need sources that are that good, which is no easy matter, especially if you want to cover the full frequency span of the device (several decades). For instance, the SRS DS360 claims -100dBc distortion from 10mHz to 20 kHz. It's not too pricey at about $3000.
